So here we are. I wish I could say we are at a crossroad but I am afraid it is too late for that. “Clean” nuclear energy is everywhere. Japan has 55 operating nuclear power plants. Four were effected by the earthquake and Tsunami that happened on March 11, 2011. There were explosions and fires. Radiation has leaked and contaminated some workers along with one worker reported dead. ¹·² All the backup systems did not work. Evacuations for miles were needed. Iceland, California and Washington all have traces of radiation, reported not harmful, but still?
How is this safe? How is Nuclear energy safe? ³
The answer… It can never be safe.
It is true that many things can never be completely safe, that is just life.
One thing for sure is that when you are born you are 100% at risk to die…someday.
There is so much conflict in this world. Most of this conflict is about energy: Libya, Sudan, Angola, Afghanistan, Iraq, Uganda, etc..
Many wars are fought for resources, oil being number one, water not far behind.
You can check out these two sites, one is a pdf put out by OECD the other is put out by Prairie.org which is Illinois Humanities Council to go into more detail about areas in conflict and the fight for resources.
People die in war…for oil. Oil to run cars and bring electricity to your homes and office.
Please do not think I believe this is the only reason people die in war. I fully understand there are many reason people die in war, I am stating that oil is one of the reasons.
Build more nuclear plants. It is clean energy you say.
People protest with lots of proof (radiation risk and toxic waste) of how dangerous nuclear plants are and how it is not clean energy. The argument is that there is too much at stake to not build them, too much money to be had and too many lives inconvenience if electricity does not flow quickly and effortlessly.
Effortlessly to the consumer but is it really effortless.
I know many people are focused on creating change and having a lighter footstep. I am hoping more people look at what is involved. The radiation, the stored toxic waste, the workers that risk their health.
Too many people don’t wants to change their ways. It is much easier to not look at the truth of what it took to get that toaster to work, they just want to butter their hot crisp bread.
I say anyone who doesn’t want to change their ways should witness, first hand, the death of someone that has been exposed to radiation.
They should have to raise those children damaged from their mothers being exposed to radiation. Do this, then tell me you don’t want to change your ways.
I do not think, at this time, it possible to give up Nuclear Energy, Oil or Natural Gas. ³
I am not saying I want to give up all these, maybe I do but this is not the point.
I do not think wind power or solar or bio fuel alone is the answer.
I am not trying to take anyone back to the dark ages-as this common phrase is often used.
Here’s my point wrapped up tight in a pin head, (a nut shell would have way too many words for many people to have the patience to read):
Let’s show the world we have empathy, Lets show the world solidarity with their pains which are theirs now but so quickly can turn to our own.
I know many will say, “Not possible!” “Won’t work!” “Not enough!”
My answer to this is “It is possible on some levels.” “It can work for a positive direction, even if not complete correction.” “It is something, which is better than nothing.”
Here’s is my suggestion of how we can do this.
Here’s my wish. This has not yet made it to TED Wish status but it should and my hope is that it will.
(When you read the next sentence, my hope is that you will read the one after that.)
My wish is for us to live without electricity for one year to show solidarity.
If you can’t live a whole year then live a month, live a week, live a day, live an hour.
Lets ask everyone to give up something. We can start a website that tracks how many are involved and to what extent they have removed electricity consumption from their lives. I know it sounds contradictory to have a computer web site track this but maybe that computer could use a solar battery. I am still going to use a computer for most of this, it will not be the “something” I am giving up. Things can be worked out. Don’t get stuck on all the little details that catch us and give us an excuse to not do something.
Do something! Get involved.
In this website there will be articles on what to do if you go a week without electricity. How will you keep your food fresh? There will be an article on this. How will you flush your toilet or take a shower? More about this too. I have lived without electricity for years, I have lived without running water by choice for almost 10 years, no hot water…oh my!
This is just the start of this project. It will start April 28th. Start it now if you want. We will add it to our documents if you write it down and send in your story.
How can we possible prove that any of the stories are true, we are building this website on trust. Yes, remember that? It is not scientific unless someone adds that as a possibility.
I am hoping others colaborate on this. My wish is that this gets way bigger, yes I just said that-way bigger-then I can handle and I have to lovingly turn it over to someone.
I will start this website on the free wordpress site. Lights Out for World Peace
Click above or Here is the link. http://lightsoutforworldpeace.wordpress.com/
Join me to make this change happen.
They say one person can make a difference. Lets make that one turn into millions.
1 Workers http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Battle_to_stabilise_earthquake_reactors_1203111.html A seriously injured worker was trapped within Fukushima Daiichi unit 1 in the crane operating console of the exhaust stack and is now confirmed to have died. Four workers were injured by the explosion at the same reactor and have been taken to hospital. A contractor was found unconscious and taken to hospital. Two workers of a ‘cooperative firm’ were injured, said Tepco; one with a broken bone. A Tepco employee who was unable to stand and grasping his left chest was taken to hospital.At Fukushima Daiini unit 3 one worker received a radiation dose of 106 mSv. This is a notable dose, but comparable to levels deemed acceptable in emergency situations by some national nuclear safety regulators.The whereabout of two Tepco workers remains unknown.
2 http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/tsunami-in-japan-quake-hit-japan-faces-new-threat-nuclear-meltdown/articleshow/7690283.cms The explosion at the nuclear plant , Fukushima Dai-ichi, 170 miles (274 kilometers) northeast of Tokyo, appeared to be a consequence of steps taken to prevent a meltdown after the quake and tsunami knocked out power to the plant, crippling the system used to cool fuel rods there. The blast destroyed the building housing the reactor, but not the reactor itself, which is enveloped by stainless steel 6 inches (15 centimeters) thick. Inside that superheated steel vessel, water being poured over the fuel rods to cool them formed hydrogen. When officials released some of the hydrogen gas to relieve pressure inside the reactor, the hydrogen apparently reacted with oxygen, either in the air or the cooling water, and caused the explosion. “They are working furiously to find a solution to cool the core,” said Mark Hibbs, a senior associate at the Nuclear Policy Program for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Nuclear agency officials said Japan was injecting seawater into the core ? an indication, Hibbs said, of “how serious the problem is and how the Japanese had to resort to unusual and improvised solutions to cool the reactor core.”Officials declined to say what the temperature was inside the troubled reactor, Unit 1. At 2,200 degrees Fahrenheit (1,200 degrees Celsius), the zirconium casings of the fuel rods can react with the cooling water and create hydrogen. At 4,000 F (2,200 C), the uranium fuel pellets inside the rods start to melt, the beginning of a meltdown.Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said radiation around the plant had fallen, not risen, after the blast but did not offer an explanation. Virtually any increase in dispersed radiation can raise the risk of cancer, and authorities were planning to distribute iodine, which helps protect against thyroid cancer. Authorities ordered 210,000 people out of the area within 12 miles (20 kilometers) of the reactor.
³http://notrickszone.com/2011/03/14/even-candles-kill-many-more-than-nuclear-power/One commenter writes: Not an opponent of nukes, but proponents seem to be drinking a little too much of their own kool-aid. This disaster shows serious design flaws: 1) under built sea wall, 2) apparently all backup power and switchgear in flood-able area, 3) close proximity of reactors allowed one to damage another, and makes response difficult, 4) reported today that the pool in #4 is believed to have cracked (per NY Times), so under-designed, 5) design allows for H2 explosions in outer containment, which cripple the plant, 6) apparently little ability to connect emergency water to the pools, 7) fuel stored on top of reactor, no offsite equipment available, truly designed to deal with this accident. Not exactly a design flaw, but also appears to be poor crisis management capability